lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 11:02:45 -0700 From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> To: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>, Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 03/14] x86/cet/ibt: Add IBT legacy code bitmap setup function On 6/10/19 8:22 AM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote: >> How does glibc know the linear address space size? We don’t want LA64 to >> break old binaries because the address calculation changed. > When an application starts, its highest stack address is determined. > It uses that as the maximum the bitmap needs to cover. Huh, I didn't think we ran code from the stack. ;) Especially given the way that we implemented the new 5-level-paging address space, I don't think that expecting code to be below the stack is a good universal expectation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists